This article is within the scope of WikiProject Languages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of standardized, informative and easy-to-use resources about languages 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.
The section on Sarmatians put out a call for references on Scythian words to this article. The discussion page cites chalibes, "steel". This is not an Aryan or an Indo-European word in origin. The Chalybes were the metallurgists for the region. At one time between the little and big Caucasus mountains natural nodes of bronze and steel were lying around on the surface. The people living there, who must have descended to Georgians and other Caucasian peoples, began working the copper. Eventually they invented tuyeres, which enabled them to achieve higher temperatures, at which point they discovered natural steel, which was iron mixed with Arsenic and Carbon. When they learned how to vary the Carbon content by puddling, they became the steel-mongers of the region. They developed a distinctive art, which has since come to be called "Scythian art." It is the famed animal and woven vegetation style, which you see also in Mycenaean art, with the "flying leap"of the gazelles. That they were not Indo-European is certain. The Chalybes are pretty well known in Biblical studies, living north of Assyria. Moreover, some of them descended to the kingdom or Urartu, which came from the original Hurrians. Urartu was taken over by Indo-European-speaking Armenians, on account of which the Armenians often take credit for the entire widespread style of art. These matters are explicated on any good history of Armenia or Georgia as well as on the Internet. Try topics such as copper or steel, ancient, or origin. The plains people, or Aryans, got most of their metal goods from the Caucasus region, although some was from the Urals, and then later some from Czechoslovakia and Poland. The Caucasus contains its own very ancient languages including many now defunct, such as Hattili and Hurrili as well as Urartean. We don't have much on the Chalybes and the origin of human use of metals in Wikipedia but if no one else does it eventually I will get to it. Meanwhile, it might be good not to get too carried away by Iranians. Not everything is Iranian. And, the Indo-Europeans may have been great horse traders, but they got their metal and their metal weapons and at least some of their vocabulary regarding those things from someone else.
"Aryan" and "Indo-European" are not synonymous, as your phrasing here would tend to imply. "Aryan" properly refers to the Indo- Iranian branch of Indo-European alone. Also, while on the topic of "Aryan", why is that old chestnut always allowed to appear in Wikipedia articles about "Aryan" meaning "noble", for which there is not the slightest evidence?
I thought there was at least some slight evidence for that one... arya- like Cognates in all the really old Indo-European languages, including Avestan, Sanskrit, Hittite, Greek (aristo-), Celtic, Gothic, Anglo-Saxon, Latin, etc.... Hopefully someone with better data at their fingertips can fill this one out... ፈቃደ (ውይይት) 06:33, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
Sanskrit and Avestan are both Indo-Iranian languages so of course 'arya-' does appear in both - although with no certain meaning besides its use as the ethnonym for the original speakers of either language - but there are no certain cognates in any dialect outside of the Indo- Iranian branch. The root of Greek 'aristo-' may well be related to that of 'arya-', but 'aristo-' is not in Greek an ethnonym and thus any indication that the Indo-European ancestors of the Greeks ever called themselves 'arya-' or *aryo-. Those forms in Celtic and Germanic to which you refer were once thought to be cognates of 'arya-' but which etymologies have since been rejected. I'm not myself aware of any supposed cognates in Latin or Hittite.
See Wiktionary, although I agree that the Celtic and Anatolian comparanda are dubious and Mallory/Adams explicitly state that there is no evidence that it was ever used as an ethnonym outside of Indo-Iranian. And of course, the derivation from Semitic is bullshit, although I cannot check the source right now. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 18:40, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
What's the point of this section? I mean exact point. The non-Iranic OR non-IE origin? Can you provide your sources? --Zyma (talk) 21:12, 1 March 2015 (UTC)