1. In connection with “As” ethnonym, two more people have a direct association: Azeri (“As-Eri”, etymologyzed in Türkic “As-People”, and whose endoethnonym Azeri continues to the present, and Balkars (dialectal form of “Bulgars”, whose  general endoethnonym is “As”.

2. Ossetes' endoethnonyms are Digor and Iron, no connection with “As”.  Ironically, Ossetes use the ethnonym “As” for their neighbors, Karachai-Balkars. They do not even own their supposedly own name.

3. Not “all the evidence” points to Ossetes descending from the Medieval Alans. Actually, the evidence is entirely missing, while significant evidence points to the opposite. The most powerful evidence is that the term Ossete is of a Russian origin dating to the mid-1820s, and used by the Ossettes as an endonym only with the introduction of the Stalinist passportization in the 1930's. It took generations and repeated registration and passportization to induce people to get used to the new politonym, and now each Ossette has 2 or even 3 ethnonyms. Before that, the term As was used by the Ossetes exclusively for the Balkar-Karachai people: As for their Türkic Balkar neighbors, and Ghara-As (Kara As ~ Black As) for their Türkic Karachai neighbors.

4. The tribal name of the people was As “people”, “tribe”, their location was alan ~ steppe. The confederation called Alan “Flat-landers”, like any other confederation, consisted of numerous ethnic tribes with their own endonyms (we know Iazuges, Rhoxalans, etc.), while the tribe As at different times belonged to a variety of political entities: As-Tokhars (2nd c. BC), Türkic Kaganate (6th c. AD), Khazar Kaganate (8th c. AD), Alans (2nd c. AD, 9 th c. AD). Alans are also known as horse nomadic people, while the Ossettes are exclusively sedentary as far as sees the eye. Confusing one with the other is nothing but a trouble.

1. The Russian authoritative academic encyclopedia “Languages of Russian Federation” twice the Caucasian substrate of the Ossetian: “…there is a reason to talk about “Caucasian substrate” of the Ossetian language” (p. 393), “Words from Caucasian languages constitute the main lexicon of the Ossetian language, so we are forced to talk about its Caucasian substrate…” (p. 403).  Linguistic substrate is: “An indigenous language that contributes features to the language of an invading people who impose their language on the indigenous population”. The base lexicon, vocalism, phonetics, morphology, nouns, pronouns, verbs, grammar voice, participles, conjunctions, grammatical gender, exclamations, grammatical particles, word formation, and syntax have no relation whatsoever to the Iranian languages (“Languages of Russian Federation and neighboring countries”. "Encyclopedia in three volumes, Volume 2, Moscow, Science, 2001, pp. 391-405 ).

According to the above Encyclopedia, and not withstanding claims to the opposite, Iranian is an adstrate in the Ossetian, not a substrate, and it can't be both. Accordingly, any claims to the “more archaic” pedigree is a pure nonsense.

To call a language with the above properties a “North East Iranian language” is an abomination. The source of Iranisms is also known: Ossetian men have none of the Persian Y-DNA, while the Iron-Ossetian females carry 12-31% of the Persian female mt-DNA. The fecund Caucasian men loved to have Persian ladies in their harems. The mt-DNA is transmitted practically intact (one mutation in 10,000 years) exclusively along the female line.

1. Connection of Georg. Ovset'i and Ovsi > Oset'i, Оsi with “As” is merely a conjecture, devoid of proper etymology.

2. Profusely documented ethnonym “As” is used to justify a conjectural hypothesis not supported by profusely documented or even non-conjectural evidence.

2. The statement that Bulgars/Balkars have occupied their territory since the 13th-14th c. directly contradicts the historical data. In the 650es, the Great Bulgaria bordered on the kingdom of the Caspian Huns in the present Dagestan, so the presence of Bulgars/Balkars has a good historical reason, ignored by the stipulation cited by the author. That is in addition to the unsustainable argument that Balkars are called As(s)i because they occupied the land of  As(s)i: Alans and Goths were not called Iberians when they occupied Iberia, the Iberian land was renamed to Catalonia, and Alans and Goths were not called Africans when they occupied Africa, the African land was called Vandalia, and so with every other occupation.

3. Transfer of their own ethnonym to their neighbor, and abandoning their own ethnonym is just another unique and peculiar conjecture uniquely associated only with the Osset-Alan hypothesis.

4. As-Tigor is a transparent form of As-Tochar, a combination name so common in Türkic ethnonymy, and historically defined by contemporaries as Tochars ruled by Ases. The name Digors, who are totally, profusely unrelated genetically to the Irons and Iranians, is a form of the tribal name Tochars, a subject of the Ases-Bulgars dynastic tribe.

Y-SNP haplogroup Legend	Persians Isfahan	S. Ossetia  Ironians	N. Ossetia  Digorians

5. “All the evidence” points to the opposite paradigm from what A.Alemany is trying to make a cause for.

2. The statement that Bulgars/Balkars have occupied their territory since the 13th-14th c. directly contradicts the historical data.

3. Transfer of their own ethnonym to their neighbor, and abandoning their own ethnonym is just another unique and peculiar conjecture associated with the Osset-Alan hypothesis. Like once settled, the Jamestowners would abandon their endoethnonym “English” without a trace and wholesale switch to endoethnonym “Patuxets”, and the Patuxet Indians would stop being Patuxets and call themselves, say, “Digorians”, also without a trace.

“and the Yass language is known to come from line of Besenyo (Badjanak), who live next to Tanais and Meotian Lake”.

This is a direct statement that As/Yass language is a Türkic language. Besenyos are well attested as Türkic-speaking, moreover in the ears of the translators from the Greek court, the speak Kipchak language. In sect 6.7, the author also cites “According to al-Biruni, their (i.e.“the tribe of Alans and As” (gins al-Lan wa'l-As) language was then made up of a mixture of H^warizmian (i.e. Chorasmian) and Pecheneg (i.e. Badjanak, Besenyo) (wa-lugathum al-an mutarakkibat min al-H^warizmiyah wa'l-Bagnakiyah) .³¹ Because of high evidentiary value, skipping translation here, as opposed to the detailed translations everywhere, signals about the objectivity of the author.

1. Someone can be a king of Ossets without being ethnically an Osset himself, so this equating is not unblemished.

2. “Alsu” happened to be a popular Türkic female name, so king-Alan has a daughter with Türkic, and not Ossetian, name, not too god for an Ossetian cause.

1. Alan can be a king of Ossets without being an Osset himself, so equating them is not unblemished.

2. “Alsu” happened to be a popular Türkic female name, so the unnamed king-Alan has a daughter with Türkic, and not Ossetian, name, not too god for an Ossetian cause, but favoring the Türkic Badjanak evidence of the contemporaries (see, for example, http://123-baby-names.com/origin_meaning_Alsu.html)..