ALBANIA

The hypothesis of the Kartvelian origin of the toponym "Albania" seems incredible only at first glance. Neither of the two Albanias (in the Caucasus and in the Balkans) has a clear etymology. Since in a large number of toponyms the initial "A" means the definite article, we have the right (and in the context of scientific research not even the right, but the duty) to suspect the article in all names starting with "A". Including Albania. Without the initial "A" discarded as an article, we are left with the base "Lbania" with a sufficient degree of confidence that it is a truncated "Lubania". What arguments are there in favor of this version? First, in the Byzantine version of the Greek language the country was called by the word "Albanitia", which clearly hides the Kartvelian "Albaneti". Second, the hypothesis is supported by the existence of the surname "Alibania". Taking into account the problem of upsilon, we have the right to assume the following chain: Alibania <-- Alybania <-- Alubania Third, the strongest argument in favor of the upsilon falling out of the root is the spelling of Albania in the "Primary Chronicle": А Л Ъ В А Н Ь ЫА As we can see, the word is written with a hard sign, which is usually explained precisely as a former vowel. And, finally, the last argument in favor of interpreting "Albania" as a combination of the article with the root is the old name of the Caucasian Avars, considered to be descendants of the Caucasian Albanians: halbi (halbi). The combination "Ha-" at the beginning of a word is the generally recognized Phoenician article. In addition, the word "halbi" is almost identical to the word "chalibes", written with an upsilon (that is, having the sound [u] inside the root). Which equates the root "lub" with the combination "lb". To the fair remark that the word "Albania" in this interpretation has two definite articles at once, it must be answered that the initial "A-" is a Phoenician, that is, an eastern article, while the final "-a" is a Basque, that is, a western article. If we consider that the two languages ​​belong to different language families, then the Phoenicians and Basques are not obliged to recognize the article in each other's languages. Moreover, according to Klimov, the opposition over the location of the demonstrative pronoun (i.e., the definite article) took place even within the Kartvelian family itself. Conventionally speaking, the one who added, say, the final "-a" as an article, perceived "Alban" as a whole root. Or vice versa, the one who added the initial "A-" did not know that in the word "Lubania" the morpheme "-a" is an article. How many people today are aware that the word "Francia" ends with an article?