Talk:Waššukanni

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cities, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of cities, towns and various other settlements on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CitiesWikipedia:WikiProject CitiesTemplate:WikiProject CitiesWikiProject Cities articles

Ancient Near East Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ancient Near East, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ancient Near East related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ancient Near EastWikipedia:WikiProject Ancient Near EastTemplate:WikiProject Ancient Near EastAncient Near East articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Bashkani[edit]

I don't understand, why isn't there more research into the relation between Hurrians, Mitanni and Kurds? Geographically and linguistically at the centre of the Kurdish world =/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.169.129.211 (talk) 00:06, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kurdish descends from Median, which is definitely on the Iranic side of Indo-Iranian, while the Indic element in Mitanni is definitely from the Indic side. The -anni suffix means land, place, country of, as in Mitanni, land of Mitra (Mithra, Mithras). Mike Nassau (talk) 21:58, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Its name can be on many languages... but its most probable that the word Washukanni or its parts evoluted during the 3.000 yrs period... on relation with Hurrians pretending also Nakh-Daghestani people that have many similarities in language structure, basic glossary similarities, social structure, architecture (mostly with Urartian), religion(pagan, nowadays theyr Muslim). Some scholars even put them (Hurrians and Nakh-Daghs) in Alarodian group... Anyway Mitanni as any other Hurrian state wasnt mono-ethnic so it pobable were living to different ethnic groups as Arameans, Proto-Kurds etc... Nakh 04:21, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's pretty well established that the ruling class of the Mitanni were (at least at some point) Indic speakers, while most of the population of the area were Hurrian speakers (though, doubtless other's were present, perhaps including proto-Kurds, though I know of no direct evidence of their presence there at this time). The first element of Wassukanni (unless the name does precede the presence of the Indic element there) was probably related to either Sanskrit Vasu- (class of Gods) or, if the double -ss- in some of its forms conceals an original long preceding -a-, Sanskrit Va:su- dwelling. The latter gives a better semantic fit, but the former the better phonological fit. Johundhar (talk) 15:43, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Even though Kurdish is in the category of Iranian languages, it has an ergative structure, unlike other Iranian languages. And among the ergative languages, the Hurrian and Sumerian languages that existed in the Middle East, along with Kurdish, are also ergative languages. The fact that Kurdish has become Iranian over time may still mean that it has Hurrian roots. The idea generally accepted by researchers is that the Kurds were assimilated in the time of the Medes. They stated that the Gordyene (Corduene), who are considered to be the ancestors of the Kurds, also worshiped the Hurrian god Teshup. It should also be noted that the ruling class of the Mitanni is Aryan and the people are Hurrian.Aamir Khan Kepzerrin

Page move[edit]

Antiquistik, I just wanted to register a mild dissent regarding the page move. I understand the impetus behind it, but my gut feeling and a quick and unscientific scan of google results leads me to the (tentative) conclusion that the more anglicized Washukanni is the WP:COMMONNAME. That said, I am not overly bothered. Cheers. Dumuzid (talk) 03:16, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dumuzid should I have it renamed back to Washukanni or do we leave the page name as it is? Antiquistik (talk) 03:24, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. I would say let's leave it here for a bit and see if we get any other input! As I say, it's a minor enough orthographic change that it will likely not make much difference. Cheers. Dumuzid (talk) 03:28, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's fair. Antiquistik (talk) 03:36, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not that it's a rule, but when you are contemplating a page move, it's never a bad idea to leave a notice on the talk page, and then wait a day or two just to see if there are any thoughts. If you did something like that here, then I missed it (entirely possible). But, as I say, completely understand this move. Cheers. Dumuzid (talk) 03:44, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]